With the results of two great battle added to the normal 100 plus in experience I had more than 200 more experience points to spend on upgrades. With units going over 5 in moral there are additional, but expensive, upgrades available. The 7th Infantry was chosen to receive sharpshooter training.

Prussia was forced into another triple surrender. This has left Prussia at the bottom of the list. It will likely stay there unless the Prussian King goes after Russia with gusto-I think I would if I were in his boots. There is still time for vengeance against his good friends in the south.

A new merchant fleet was launched this month-and another one was promptly ordered. At this time, Istanbul and Aydin are the only two level 7 dock cities-so that is were the new fleets are being built. I am under the impression that it is a quicker job at level 7 dock cities.

By the end of 1812, the Ottoman Empire will have 5 merchant fleets-up from the one that was used from 1792 to January of 1812. This will help in a good cash flow enabling the lowering of taxes-hopefully.

This is a bit of a strategic gamble. There is a possibility of trouble with Great Britain. Should that trouble arise, my new merchant fleets will be of somewhat reduced value.

The Czar has done little to retake his occupied lands. He did recapture a few provinces and inflicted some losses on Austria in one (Gomel). I would have expected him to retake everything while he had a chance. This would have hurt Austrian and Ottoman moral (helping Prussia) while getting Russia's moral and production back up to peak performance.

I feel bad for Prussia, but at least he was playing. Sweden is in 3rd place and doesn't seem to have done much of anything the entire game.

Apretzo, the Prussian King, was indeed playing an active role throughout the game. It is too bad what had happened to Prussia. Even in my grand plan I never intended to hurt it quite so bad. I was going to help Russia retake some important areas from Russia, but the Czars intransigence change the whole picture-I am now more friendly with Austria than Russia-that was never planned on occurring.

Sweden is being played by a veteran player. I think he chose Sweden so he could have a low keyed game-even so, he knew how to get close to the top-while doing little on the international stage.

This looks to be the end of the game. Iron Warrior, who did the turn merge is having some difficulties with his new W7 computer. During the wait for turn 238, Anthropoid (Russian player) decided to call it quits. It is possible that the game could be resumed, but I seriously doubt that will happen.

I found this to be quite a challenging game. In both the diplomatic and military areas, there are no guarantees of performance.

The most challenging time was in the first Otto/Austrian War. I considered surrendering more than once-as there seemed to be no way out. The second war with Austria (Emperor Matto, The Great) still had its thrills, but not with the threat of total defeat hanging over my head as in the first war. The war with Spain was a forgone conclusion-although the initial battles were not known to be a sure thing-I was confident of eventual victory there.

Both of the Turk wars with Prussia were not expected in the way that those occurred. I think the Prussian King (Apretzo) was conned by the Czar into some wild plans-then left out on a limb-such things happen.

The most dastardly thing that occurred in this game was the stabbing of France in the back (by the good king Iron Warrior of Spain) during the first Ottoman/Austrian War. France took such losses in that war that it took many years-more than a decade IIRC, to make good the losses. Russia's attack on Prussia early in the game, an attack that quickly spread to a general war is the runner up for the most dastardly act. Although I was planning on war, I was not ready.

The most frustrating times of this game was trying to coordinate diplomacy, miltary, or even trade with the Czar. I think he was purposely trying to irritate me so as to help me justify his belief that I would turn on him in the future. In the end, he was right-but only because of his prodding.

Great Britain was played very craftily (King Kingmaker), but I think he got stuck in a corner. I had long anticipated a war with GB at the very end of the game. I was getting close to making a move on Georgia. This likely would have caused a war with GB. However, I no longer had any fear of such a war. GB would need ever other major power to take the O.E. down-and that was just no longer feasible. Not only are the other powers disjointed, but Ottoman forces are very strong-and significant additions were planned.

I owe much to Emperor Terje of France. Without his moral fortitude to fight on, the O.E. could have suffered some fiasco. France was not subservient to the O.E. at all in this game. We had a de-facto alliance long before the official one came about. During that time I thought it was more likely that France would come in on top-rather than the O.E.

On the economic scene I was planning on doubling trade income. The last big holdup was the completion of "guns" in Constantinople. Textiles were going to be maximized for export. Taxes were being lowered-production already exceeded 50 per month-it would have been sweet.

As far as empire building, the last possible moves were to defeat Russia, but before that, DoW and capture Georgia. This would have enabled Turkey to keep the Crimea-more points for the O.E.

I hope the readers got some entertainment, or at least a few pointers on what and what not to do, from this AAR/DAR. The start was a bit rough, but most pertinent information was finding its way into the report long before the end. Too bad the statistics pages went haywire. Those were a convenient way to show the situation.

One year and ten months of war and intrigue are at an end. In game time, it was just short of 20 years.

1. You missed an R in my name 2. I think that the most dastardly event was not the DoW on me by Spain (although it was a sneak attack), but the stab in my back when Preussia decided she would not let me take out Spain and DoW'ed me and marched on Paris with me having no troops to prevent it. After all, at that time I had been at war with Spain for ages, and Preussia only acted in the final month with nothing to lose for herself. In the end Preussia gained 1 province as opposed to the 3 I offered for a peace treaty. But then again it seems that this was the prelude to Preussia being isolated later on.

My congratulations again to Anthony for his well thought out strategy and by all accounts excellent diplomacy. Thanks to Peter for stepping in when Mus left, sorry Prussia had to repay that by stabbing you. I still feel a little 'forced' into that step as at that time I didn't like the idea of losing glory every turn stuck between a Defensive pact and an alliance. I also had delusions of capability at that time, thinking the Prussian army might have the wherewithal to take on the Ottomans.I can't help feeling that Britain is almost unassailable in this current build though. No amount of loss on the land was going mean you were in trouble when you had the wooden walls of the RN. Historically accurate, but a bit difficult to grapple with in a game. Thanks to Bill, a stout ally throughout, although once again I maybe should have chosen to let the defensive pact run to conclusion than annul the alliance with Peter. Still, you ruled the world for a goodly period with an approach that I think revolved around glory through possessions and art??? Terje, disappointing for you that you didn't get Napolean. Certainly early on, when you went after Bill and Martin. Having Nappy may have made all the difference. I think my bout of delusion that Prussia was somehow a world player was heightened by my attack in your NW that ultimately meant you lost to Spain.Thanks also for allowing diplomacy to sort out our issues around the Rhine when you might have thrown your weight into carving Prussia up when Russia first attacked (2nd major war).I didn't attack you early in the Spanish war as I had barely got over the attack by the Russians. That first war spanked my man power and currency, but I did feel I had to do something about my ally in peril - more than the paltry delivery of funds. However, from your perspective that lost you the war, so understandable. Seamus, if only we could have bought Martin over to the dark side maybe the world could have turned on the Turk. Not to be. From my perspective it appeared Russia is one of the harder nations to play. Her internal issues and tough glory targets making it really hard to get traction. Even the single-minded approach of going for barracks to make your vast army capable (a la Anthony) would be very hard to achieve with Russia. Martin, I think we dithered a bit. You got so potent early on that I thought continuing to be allied to you was starting to feel like the lap dog to the King when we were supposed to have designs on the crown ourselves. As it was, of course, the world turned against you, and at that time you could have used a friend, even one that also went down in flames, rather than what I did instead which was stand back and let it happen.We seemed quite evenly matched in the end, would have been interesting to see who would have triumphed if the Ottoman Damocles sword wasn't also hanging over my head. Andrew, a tough game for you. Not sure Sweden can do that much, even if they do play a very good diplomatic game. I think they almost have to take Denmark diplomatically - navy inclusive - and a good Britain should be opposed to such things, which is of course a dichotomy of what you're trying to achieve: firm friendship with Britain - you can't really afford a full naval war against her. Kudos for staying in the game. Pity we couldn't bring Britain down so you could keep Denmark, even without the Navy. Personally I found Prussia interesting and frustrating. She is sandwiched in between everyone, and as such has to make some very difficult and telling diplomatic choices. I blundered at these something shocking. I was also a little surprised that a game that had see-sawed so much could not be persuaded to see-saw again.. against the Turks. I know I tried, and put my money where my mouth was. But alliances held firm and from that point the game was decided. To my defence I started this game having played one time through as Britain :-) so that's not the best preparation. I'll agree that the turn speed was probably too slow. Although I know I did some pretty extensive agonising over some of the turns. I think the game could still use some pretty extensive polish, and especially, the instant combat effects of the upgrades made plain. Overall though, very interesting game. If they do patch it, I could be up for a rematch, I promise to sheath the dagger a little more :-)

Prussia is in a tough spot-right in the middle of everything-almost. No doubt we would all do a couple things differently in a rematch. You did keep the little Empire busy-and in the sights of bigger powers.

But was Austria really in a position to attack the OE? I would not have stood idly by, I allready had enough dangers in my vicinity, and a bigger Austria was not something I really wanted to see, espesially on the expense of the OE. I know that if Austria had issued a DoW on the OE, France would DoW Austria in return.

And I never went after anyone (again with the calling me a warmongerer hehe) . I DoW'ed Austria due to my alliance with Russia who issued the DoW, then Spain sneak attacked so I had to fight her too. I've been saying all along, France only wants to eat her smelly cheese and drink wine

Nappy would not have changed anything tbh, I had nothing to put against your 200.000 man strong army just waiting to head for Paris. Nappy alone against 200k angry Preussians are a tad much even for Nappy

Maybe Austria was not in a position to attack the Ottomans, but it wasn't to be done alone. Honestly you were supposed to be in the mix too. The point was to try and topple the Ottomans and they'd shown how hard that would be. Without France it would always have been very difficult. Yes, a very long shot, but the only shot left from my perspective. One person's view. Well if you attacked no-one then I could claim the same thing. I was attacked by Russia in the first war, attacked you to help Spain in the second, had the devil's alternative against Britain, and had war with Austria and Turkey the last two time due to a defensive pact with Russia. However, I'm pretty certain 'I' had a bit more to do with it than that if I'm honest....

And true Nappy couldn't have done much when I attacked, but that kind of was the point. You left nothing at home and I knew I'd be able to help my ally much more that way.

Ah, but the point is that Preussia did not join the war untill everything was nearly over. But yes, I see your reasons, however I am no fan of them (how could I be, I was the one on the reciving end after all ).

I think you fail to see the fact that I was not going to abandon the Ottoman Empire. It was thanks to Ottoman aid that France was able to recover to the extent she did. I was more than happy aiming for the positions behind the OE, so I would not have joined in an alliance against her no matter what.

I think you fail to see the fact that I was not going to abandon the Ottoman Empire. It was thanks to Ottoman aid that France was able to recover to the extent she did. I was more than happy aiming for the positions behind the OE, so I would not have joined in an alliance against her no matter what.

Terje

Ah, music to my ears. I assume the aid you are refering to is the spice and luxury goods for a cheap price. It became evident that you no longer needed those, but it was a sign of continued support.

Had this game gone on, by the end of 1812 (after the last project,guns, was completed in Istanbul)the amount of textiles made available to France would have doubled. I noticed that there was a rather large increase of 'arts" being built-those could have continued to increase. France would have surpassed the O.E. before the end of the game. I was still building plenty, but time to completion is a bit on the long side. The base time,even after reducing feudal level to two, was 40 months w/o labor. In fast track provinces, such as Basra, completion times could be brought down to 4 months. That is with roads development optimized, and with max labor.

I was somewhat looking forward to France and the O.E. fighting everyone at once-it would have been...historic. I needed another year to be ready for that, but was moving towards provocative actions by the summer of 1812. The Ottoman Army was going to get another 10% expansion-and the patriotism upgrade for the home front.

Will be looking forward to reading these AAR's and reliving the game again. :)

Great game, a shame that I can't combine on the new PC.

I knew I'd end up with some bad karma after the sneak attack, but I also knew it was all or nothing lol. In hindsight, sneak attacks do seem a bit gamey and probably don't really belong in the game. The harsh terms of surrender with France were the same thing- all or nothing. At that point I was in dire straits, unable to defend my assets in Africa and Italy (due to ongoing conflicts of interest with GB) and had little choice but to try to carve a path by land to Italy (which at the time was still a valuable asset). It didn't work out in the end, of course, but I had to try. :D (Sorry Terje- nothing personal I swear! :D)

A very interesting game, although I think I'm not very charismatic with diplomacy. :D Would love to try another game in the future if we get a good patch that addresses many of the issues. Although I think I prefer the 1805 scenario overall.

Thanks to all the players dedication to the game. And Ottoman Empire and France for the AAR's. I enjoyed the trip through (game)time. Able to keep up with the happenings allowed me to be a happy observer.